Skip to content

Enable fmt-write-bloat for Windows #142841

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 22, 2025
Merged

Enable fmt-write-bloat for Windows #142841

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 2 additions & 7 deletions tests/run-make/fmt-write-bloat/rmake.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -15,14 +15,9 @@
//! `NO_DEBUG_ASSERTIONS=1`). If debug assertions are disabled, then we can check for the absence of
//! additional `usize` formatting and padding related symbols.

//@ ignore-windows
// Reason:
// - MSVC targets really need to parse the .pdb file (aka the debug information).
// On Windows there's an API for that (dbghelp) which maybe we can use
// - MinGW targets have a lot of symbols included in their runtime which we can't avoid.
// We would need to make the symbols we're looking for more specific for this test to work.
//@ ignore-cross-compile

use run_make_support::artifact_names::bin_name;
use run_make_support::env::no_debug_assertions;
use run_make_support::rustc;
use run_make_support::symbols::any_symbol_contains;
Expand All @@ -36,5 +31,5 @@ fn main() {
// otherwise, add them to the list of symbols to deny.
panic_syms.extend_from_slice(&["panicking", "panic_fmt", "pad_integral", "Display"]);
}
assert!(!any_symbol_contains("main", &panic_syms));
assert!(!any_symbol_contains(bin_name("main"), &panic_syms));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Won't this assert trivially pass if there are no symbols at all?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point, this should be more like a codegen test hmm

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

#143669

}
Loading